Tool grip calibration for robotic surgery

ABSTRACT

Telerobotic, telesurgical, and surgical robotic devices, systems, and methods selectively calibrate end effector jaws by bringing the jaw elements into engagement with each other. Commanded torque signals may bring the end effector elements into engagement while monitoring the resulting position of a drive system, optionally using a second derivative of the torque/position relationship so as to identify an end effector engagement position. Calibration can allow the end effector engagement position to correspond to a nominal closed position of an input handle by compensating for wear on the end effector, the end effector drive system, then manipulator, the manipulator drive system, the manipulator/end effector interfacing, and manufacturing tolerances.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is generally related to medical, telesurgical,and/or telerobotic devices, systems, and methods. In an exemplaryembodiment, the invention provides structures and methods that calibratean end effector/telerobotic manipulator combination when a new surgicalrobotic tool is mounted on a manipulator arm.

Minimally invasive medical techniques are intended to reduce the amountof extraneous tissue that is damaged during diagnostic or surgicalprocedures, thereby reducing patient recovery time, discomfort, anddeleterious side effects. While many of the surgeries performed eachyear in the US could potentially be performed in a minimally invasivemanner, only a portion of current surgeries use these advantageoustechniques due to limitations in minimally invasive surgical instrumentsand the additional surgical training involved in mastering them.

Minimally invasive telesurgical systems for use in surgery have beendeveloped to increase a surgeon's dexterity and avoid some of thelimitations on traditional minimally invasive techniques. Intelesurgery, the surgeon uses some form of remote control (such as aservomechanism or the like) to manipulate surgical instrument movements,rather than directly holding and moving the instruments by hand. Intelesurgery systems, the surgeon can be provided with an image of thesurgical site at the surgical workstation. While viewing a two or threedimensional image of the surgical site on a display, the surgeonperforms the surgical procedures on the patient by manipulating mastercontrol devices, which in turn control the motion of servomechanicallyoperated instruments. The servomechanism used for telesurgery will oftenaccept input from two master controllers (one for each of the surgeon'shands) and may include two or more robotic arms or manipulators. Mappingof the hand movements to the image displayed from the image capturedevice can help the surgeon provide more direct control over movement ofthe surgical instruments.

While the new telesurgical systems and devices have proven highlyeffective and advantageous, still further improvements would bedesirable. For example, work in connection with the present inventionhas shown that misalignment between a robotic surgical end effector andan input device can decrease the useful life of some tools, and effortsto limit such misalignment can make tool and manipulator fabricationmore difficult than may be ideal. As many surgical tools may be mountedon any particular manipulator during a single surgical procedure, and astool changes will be performed while a procedure is under way, it isgenerally preferable to avoid and/or minimize any tool-swap relateddelays to the surgical procedure.

For the reasons outlined above, it would be advantageous to provideimproved devices, systems, and methods for robotic surgery, telesurgery,and other telerobotic applications. It would be particularly beneficialif these improved technologies enhanced the precision and alignment ofsophisticated robotic systems without significantly increasingcomplexity or costs, ideally allowing greater tool useful life andreliability.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally provides improved telerobotic,telesurgical, and surgical robotic devices, systems, and methods. Thepresent invention may calibrate end effectors having jaws or the likeformed with two separate end effector elements. The grip calibrationwill often be performed selectively, without calibrating some or all ofthe other degrees of freedom of an end effector/manipulator assembly.Selective calibration of grip actuation can be performed by bringing thejaw elements into engagement with each other, such as by clamping amicroforceps closed, fully closing an electrosurgical scissor, closingthe jaws of a needle grasper (with no needle or other structure disposedbetween the grasper elements), and the like. Robotic systems employingcommanded torque signals may be calibrated by bringing the end effectorelements into engagement while monitoring the resulting position of adrive system, optionally identifying a maxima or minima of a secondderivative of the torque data so as to identify an end effectorengagement position. Calibration may be effected so that the endeffector engagement position corresponds to a nominal closed position ofan input handle. Such calibration can compensate for wear on the endeffector, the end effector drive system, then manipulator, themanipulator drive system, the manipulator/end effector interfacing, andmanufacturing tolerances of each of the components of the endeffector/manipulator assembly.

In a first aspect, the invention provides a telesurgical systemcomprising an input handle having a first grip member that movesrelative to a second grip member in response to a hand gripping thehandle. A plurality of end effectors each have surgical jaws with afirst end effector element moveable relative to a second end effectorelement. A manipulator transmits a signal in response to mounting an endeffector on that manipulator. The mounted end effector may be one of theplurality of end effectors. A processor couples the input device to themanipulator, and is configured to calibrate the mounted end effector andmanipulator in response to the signal. The processor does this bycausing a calibration movement of at least one of the end effectorelements so as to bring the elements into mutual engagement. Theprocessor is configured to effect articulation of the jaws of themounted end effector in response to the gripping of the handle per thecalibration.

Typically, an input linkage supports the handle and a robotic arm of themanipulator supports the mounted end effector. The input linkage androbotic arm may each have a plurality of degrees of freedom. Theprocessor may effect movement of the robotic arm in response toarticulation of the input linkage. The processor may be configured toeffect the calibration in response to mounting of the end effector ontothe robotic arm before the end effector is used in a robotic surgicalprocedure. The processor may not determine calibration from acalibration movement of at least one degree of freedom of the roboticarm between mounting of the end effector and the robotic procedure, sothat the processor selectively calibrates articulation of the jaws. Workin connection with the present invention indicates that end effector jawalignment may limit robotic surgical tool life, may impose stringentmanufacturing tolerances, and/or may impose drive system strengthcriteria which are more onerous than those needed for some or all otherdegrees of freedom in robotic surgical tools. Hence, by selectivelycalibrating end effector jaw engagement, overall surgical tool life,tolerances, and/or costs can be improved. In fact, the processor may noteffect a calibration movement of any degree of freedom of the roboticarm between mounting of the mounted end effector and the roboticprocedure, other than articulation of the jaws. While other degrees offreedom may benefit from calibration movements along with (or insteadof) end effector jaw articulator, additional calibration movements ofother degrees of freedom may undesirably delay resumption of a surgicalprocedure interrupted by a tool swap.

Typically, the calibration will compensate for manipulator offset,manipulator wear, manipulator manufacturing tolerances, surgicalinstrument offset, surgical instrument wear, surgical instrumentmanufacturing tolerances, manipulator/surgical tool interfacing, and/orthe like. The processor may monitor movement of a drive system coupledto the end effector, and can identify a change in torque. The processormay optionally comprise a filter, and the processor may determine thechange in torque by applying the filter to torque data. In the exemplaryembodiment, the processor determines an end effector element initialengagement position by taking a second derivative of the torque data. Asa servo control loop may calculate the commanded torque from a commandedtrajectory and manipulator position data, the processor may command atrajectory and monitoring the commanded torque from the servo controllerso as to determine a position of the end effector where the commandedtorque changes.

The input device may apply a feedback force to the hand at a nominalclosed position of the handle. The processor may affect the calibrationso that the end effector initial engagement configuration corresponds tothe nominal closed position of the handle. The handle may comprise abiasing means for increasing resistance to gripping of the handlebeginning at the nominal closed position. The biasing means may comprisea spring, resilient bumper, or the like.

In some embodiments, a single-element end effector may also be couplableto the manipulator. A single-element end effector identifying signal maybe transmitted by the manipulator when the single-element end effectoris mounted thereon, and the processor may forego grip calibration inresponse to the single-element end effector signal. In an exemplaryembodiment, a tool type identifier may be transmitted from a memory of atool to the processor when a tool having the single-element end effectoris mounted to the manipulator, the tool type identifier being used bythe processor to look up, from a table of the processor's memory, aparameter indicating that grip calibration need not be performed.

In the exemplary embodiment, the processor is configured to effect thecalibration once per robotic procedure for each end effector mounted onthe manipulator. If an end effector is mounted on a second manipulator,the processor can again effect the calibration once per robotic surgicalprocedure for that end effector/manipulator combination. The calibrationmay be stored during the procedure in a memory of the processor so thatwhen a tool has been removed from a particular manipulator and issubsequently remounted onto that manipulator, the calibrationinformation can be applied without causing the calibration movement andthe like.

In another aspect, the invention provides a telerobotic systemcomprising an input having a linkage supporting a handle. The handle hasa first grip member that moves relative to a second group member when ahand grips the handle. The linkage is articulable for repositioning ofthe handle. A plurality of end effectors each comprise articulatablejaws with a first end effector element moveable relative to a second endeffector element. A manipulator having a robotic arm movably supports amounted end effector from among the plurality of end effectors. Aprocessor couples the input device to the manipulator. The processordetermines the calibration of the mounted end effector by causing acalibration movement of the end effector elements into mutualengagement. The processor effects articulation of the jaws of themounted end effector in response to the gripping of the handle per thecalibration.

In another aspect, the invention provides a telesurgical methodcomprising mounting a first surgical end effector to a manipulator. Theend effector comprises jaws with a first end effector element movablerelative to a second end effector element. The mounted first endeffector and its supporting manipulator are calibrated by moving atleast one of the end effector elements so as to bring the elements intomutual engagement. A handle is gripped with a hand so that a first gripmember moves relative to a second grip member. An articulation signal iscomputed in response to the gripping of the handle per the calibration.The jaws articulate in response to the articulation signal so that thejaws of the first end effector move in correlation with the gripping ofthe handle.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1A and 1B are perspective views illustrating a master surgeonconsole or workstation for inputting a surgical procedure, and a roboticpatient-side cart for robotically moving surgical instruments havingsurgical end effectors at a surgical site, respectively.

FIG. 2 is a side view showing an exemplary input device for use with themaster control workstation of FIG. 1A.

FIG. 2A is a perspective view of a handle and wrist of the input deviceof FIG. 2.

FIG. 3 is a perspective view of an exemplary robotic surgical instrumentor tool having a memory and a data interface.

FIGS. 3A-3F are perspective views of a plurality of different endeffectors for surgical instruments of different types.

FIG. 4 shows a block diagram representing control steps followed by thecontrol system of a minimally invasive surgical robotic apparatus ineffecting movement of the end effector of the instrument of FIG. 3 inresponse to the movement of the input device of FIG. 2.

FIG. 5A-5D schematically illustrate master/slave following forcesapplied to grip different sized objects.

FIGS. 6A-6C are functional block diagrams schematically illustratingmaster/slave arrangements for manipulating the position, orientation,and jaws of a robotic surgical instrument.

FIG. 7 schematically illustrates an exemplary master/slave roboticcontrol system for actuating jaws of an end effector while providingtactile feedback to a hand of an operator.

FIG. 8 is a functional block diagram schematically illustrating atelesurgical system according to the principles of the presentinvention.

FIG. 9 graphically illustrates a relationship between joint position andservo counts during actuation of a surgical robotic end effector in thesystem of FIG. 8.

FIG. 10 graphically illustrates a relationship between commanded torqueand servo counts during end effector actuation in the system of FIG. 8.

FIG. 11 graphically illustrates a relationship between commanded torqueand servo counts as taken from the data of FIG. 10, in which thecommanded torque has been filtered.

FIGS. 12A-12C graphically illustrate taking of a second derivative ofthe relationship illustrated in FIG. 11.

FIG. 13 graphically illustrates a relationship between commanded torqueand joint position, and identifies an initial end effector engagementconfiguration at which the end effector elements are brought into mutualengagement.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally provides telerobotic, telesurgical, andsurgical systems, devices, and methods. The invention is particularlyadvantageous for use with robotic surgical systems, in which a pluralityof surgical instruments will be sequentially mounted on a manipulatorduring the surgical procedure. Loss of correlation between an inputhandle grip actuation and jaw articulation of telesurgical systems canbe particularly problematic during telesurgery, and may be significantlymore problematic than maintaining correlation between other input andoutput degrees of freedom in a surgical master/slave system. In someembodiments, by selectively calibrating end effector jaw movement (asopposed to calibrating all degrees of freedom of the slave), unnecessarysurgical delays during tool swaps (in which one surgical instrument isremoved from the manipulator and replaced with a different surgicalinstrument) can be avoided. In other embodiments, calibration of allaxes may be performed.

While the most immediate applications for the present invention mayinclude telesurgical systems, the inventions described herein may alsofind applications in other telerobotic and robotic surgical systems.

As used herein, the term “tool” encompasses robotic tools having roboticend effectors for coupling to robotic systems. The term “instrument”encompasses medical instruments, including both those havingarticulatable jaws (such as microforceps, needle graspers, staplers,electrosurgical scissors, and the like) and those having a single endeffector element (such as scalpels, electrosurgical coagulators, and thelike). In the exemplary embodiment, a robotic surgical system makes useof a series of removable and replaceable end effectors supported by arobotic arm, so that the end effector assembly is both a tool and aninstrument. In robotic embodiments used in non-surgical applications,the end effector assembly may comprise a robotic tool that is not amedical instrument.

The data, reprogrammable software, program method steps, and methodsteps described herein may be embodied in a machine readable code andstored as a tangible medium in a wide variety of differingconfigurations, including random access memory, non-volatile memory,write once memory, magnetic recording media, optical recording media,and the like. Along with software, at least some of the programming anddata may be embodied in the form of hardware or firmware.

Referring to FIG. 1A of the drawings, an operator workstation orsurgeon's console of a minimally invasive telesurgical system isgenerally indicated by reference numeral 200. The workstation 200includes a viewer 202 where an image of a surgical site is displayed inuse. A support tool 4 is provided on which an operator, typically asurgeon, can rest his or her forearms while gripping two master controls(see FIG. 2), one in each hand. The master controls or input devices arepositioned in a space 206 inwardly beyond the support 204. When usingthe control workstation 200, the surgeon typically sits in a chair infront of the control station, positions his or her eyes in front of theviewer 202 and grips the master controls, one in each hand, whileresting his or her forearms on the support 204.

In FIG. 1B of the drawings, a cart or surgical station of thetelesurgical system is generally indicated by reference numeral 300. Inuse, the cart 300 is positioned close to a patient for whom surgery isplanned, and the base of the cart is then maintained at a stationaryposition until a surgical procedure has been completed. Cart 300typically has wheels or castors to render it mobile. The workstation 200is typically positioned at some distance from the cart 300, optionallybeing separated by a few feet within an operating room, although cart300 and workstation 200 may alternatively be separated by a significantdistance.

The cart 300 typically caries three robotic arm assemblies, althoughmore than three arms may also be provided or may be the norm for someembodiments. One of the robotic arm assemblies, indicated by referencenumeral 302, is arranged to hold an image capturing device 304, e.g., anendoscope, or the like. Each of the two other arm assemblies 10 includesa surgical instrument 14. The endoscope 304 has a viewing end 306 at adistal end of an elongate shaft. Endoscope 304 has an elongate shaft topermit viewing end 306 to be inserted through an entry port into aninternal surgical site of a patient's body. The endoscope 304 isoperatively connected to the viewer 202 to display an image captured atits viewing end 306 on the viewer. Each robotic arm assembly 10 isnormally operatively connected to one of the master controls, althoughthe processor may alter which robotic arm assembly is operativelyconnected with a master control. Thus, the movement of the robotic armassemblies 10 is controlled by manipulation of the master controls. Theinstruments 14 of the robotic arm assemblies 10 have end effectorsmounted on wrist members, which are in turn pivotally mounted on distalends of elongate shafts of the instruments 14. Instruments 14 haveelongate shafts to permit the end effectors to also be inserted throughentry ports into the internal surgical site of a patient's body.Movement of the end effectors relative to the ends of the shafts of theinstruments 14 is also controlled by the master controls.

The robotic arms 10, 302 are mounted on a carriage 97 by means of setupjoint linkages 95. The carriage 97 can be adjusted selectively to varyits height relative to a base 99 of the cart 300, as indicated by arrowsK. The setup joint linkages 95 are arranged to enable the lateralpositions and orientations of the arms 10, 302 to be varied relative toa vertically extending column 93 of cart 300. Accordingly, thepositions, orientations and heights of the arms 10, 302 can be adjustedto facilitate passing the elongate shafts of the instruments 14 and theendoscope 304 through the entry ports to desired positions relative tothe surgical site. When the surgical instruments 14 and endoscope 304are so positioned, the setup joint arms 95 and carriage 97 are typicallylocked in position. Workstation 200 and cart 300 are described in moredetail in U.S. Pat. No. 6,424,885, the full disclosure of which isincorporated herein by reference.

An exemplary input device 220 and surgical instrument 14 are illustratedin FIGS. 2 and 3, respectively. Input device 220 includes an arm 222 anda wrist 224 which allow positional and orientational movement of aninput handle 226 relative to the structure of workstation 200 (see FIG.1A). Handle 226 will generally move with a plurality of degrees offreedom relative to the workstation structure, the exemplary inputdevice 220 providing six degrees of freedom for movement of handle 226.The linkage supporting the handle may include more or less than sixdegrees of freedom.

FIG. 2A illustrates wrist 224 and handle 226 in more detail. Wrist 224generally comprises a gimbal assembly supporting handle 226, with thehandle having first and second grip members 30 a, 30 b. Wrist 224generally accommodates changes in orientation of handle 226 with threeorientational degrees of freedom.

In the exemplary embodiment, wrist 224 includes links 32 a, 32 b, and 32c. Wrist 224 is mounted to input arm or linkage 222 (see FIG. 2). Thelinks of the wrist can rotate about axes 34 a, 34 b, 34 c, and 34 d.Hence, wrist 224 provides four orientational degrees of freedom,including one redundant orientational degree of freedom. A drive systemis coupled to the wrist links so as to take advantage of this redundantdegree of freedom and provide a wide range of motion as described inU.S. Pat. No. 6,714,839 entitled “Master Having Redundant Degrees ofFreedom”, the full disclosure of which is incorporated herein byreference.

Unlike the joints of wrist 224 and input linkage 222, grip members 30 aand 30 b of handle 226 pivot passively about an axis 36 with no drivemotor provided for feedback from the slave. In the exemplary embodiment,a hall effect transducer is mounted in one of the grip members and amagnet is mounted in the other, so that handle 30 generates a gripsignal indicating the angular separation between grip numbers 30 a and30 b. A biasing system urges the grip members apart, and the gripmembers may include loops of Velcro™ or the like to more firmly positionthe grip members relative to a thumb and finger of the system operator.A wide variety of grip member structures might be used within the scopeof the invention, including any surgical instrument handles, optionallyincluding rigid or flexible loops for the thumb and/or fingers.

Referring now to FIG. 3, surgical instrument 14 generally includes asurgical end effector 50 supported relative to a housing 53 by anelongate shaft 14.1. End effector 50 may be supported relative to theshaft by a distal joint or wrist so as to facilitate orienting the endeffector within an internal surgical workspace. Proximal housing 53 willtypically be adapted to be supported by a holder of a robot arm.

As described in more detail in U.S. Pat. No. 6,331,181, the fulldisclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference, instrument 14will often include a memory 230, with the memory typically beingelectrically coupled to a data interface of a holder engaging surface232 of housing 53. This allows data communication between memory 230 anda robotic surgical processor 210 of workstation 200 (see FIG. 1A). In thexemplary embodiment, memory 230 comprises a Dallas chip sold with partnumber DS2505 having 69 kilobits of data storage capacity.

Referring now to FIGS. 3A-3F, a variety of alternative robotic surgicaltools of differing types and having differing end effectors 50 may beprovided. Several of these end effectors, including DeBakey forceps 56i, microforceps 56 ii, Potts scissors 56 iii, and clip plier 56 ivinclude first and second end effector elements 56 a, 56 b which pivotrelative to each other so as to define a pair of end effector jaws.Other end effectors, including scalpel 56 v and electrocautery probe 56vi have a single end effector element.

While the present invention may find applications with surgical roboticend effectors having a single element, the invention is particularlyadvantageous for use with end effectors defined by multiple end effectorelements. In many embodiments, the tool or end effector type can berecognized by the system through reading of some or all of the datastored by memory 230 mounted on tool 14 (see FIG. 3).

Information from the memory can be used to perform a number of functionswhen the tool is loaded on the tool holder of the manipulator arm. Forexample, the memory can be used to provide a signal verifying that thetool is compatible with the robotic system. The tool memory may storedata identifying the tool type to the robotic system so that the roboticsystem can reconfigure its programming to take full advantage of thetool's specialized capabilities. The tool memory can also store aspecific or unique identifier for that particular tool for use incontrolling tool life and hence reliability, for determining whethercalibration of that particular tool has already been performed duringthe current (or in some embodiments, a prior) procedure, and the like.Exemplary surgical robotic tool/manipulator interface structures anddetails regarding data transfer between tools and robotic systemprocessors are more fully described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,331,181 and in anapplication entitled, “Tool Memory Based Software Upgrades for RoboticSurgery”, filed concurrently herewith.

As can be understood by reference to FIGS. 1A, 1B, and 4, processor 210of workstation 200 may be configured to effect corresponding movement ofa surgical instrument mounted to a robotic arm in response to movementof an input handle by employing software embodying a control logic 212.Control logic 212 effects movement of end effector 50 within an internalsurgical site by pivoting an instrument shaft 14.1 about a minimallyinvasive insertion point (see FIG. 3). The control logic 212 employed byprocessor 210 generates motor drive signals in response to an inputhandle movement. These motor drive signals are transmitted to the robotarms, and cause movement at the end effector that corresponds tomovement at the input handle. Logic 212 of processor 210 can accommodatea wide variety of differing tool kinematics of a variety of differingtools (such as those illustrated in FIGS. 3A-3F) when informationregarding the tool type currently mounted to a robotic arm is madeavailable to the processor.

Maintaining precise control over movement of surgical tools in general,and robotic surgical tools in particular, enhances the safety andtherapeutic benefits of surgery. The use of elongate, relatively thinsurgical instruments also enhances the benefits of robotic surgery, assuch thin-shafted instruments can be inserted to an internal surgicalsite with less trauma to the patient. The surgical instruments, however,can be fairly sophisticated and complex mechanical assemblies,particularly where a plurality of end effector elements and/or degreesof freedom are provided at the distal end of the elongate shaft.Instruments 14 may include drive systems comprising cables, pulleys,rods, gears, and the like, and these mechanical components are subjectto both manufacturing tolerances and wear during the life of the tool.Additionally, the manipulator or robotic arm on which the tool ismounted may have a drive system for both transmitting motion to the tooland for moving the tool holder in space, along with having motors andposition sensors for receiving drive signals from and transmittingfeedback signals to the processor of the robotic system. Many of thesecomponents are also subject to deterioration from wear, along withhaving an initial resolution or tolerance when new. Lastly, coupling ofthe instrument to the robotic arm via the holder will often comprise amechanical engagement so as to transmit mechanical movement from themotor and drive system of the robotic arm to the end effector, alongwith structural engagement between the housing of the instrument and theholder itself. Hence, misalignment between the end effector and an inputdevice may have a number of sources, and may vary significantly betweendifferent robotic arms and tools mounted on robotic arm combinations.

Telesurgical and other telerobotic systems can accommodate a certainamount of misalignment between an input device and an end effector, asdescribed more fully in U.S. Pat. No. 6,424,885, the full disclosure ofwhich is incorporated herein by reference. However, misalignment betweenthe gripping members of a handle and the end effector elements of a pairof jaws can be particularly problematic.

Referring now to FIG. 6A, a simplified reciprocal master/slavearrangement is used to illustrate actuation of manipulator 10 so as toprovide orientation and positioning of end effector 50 in response tomovement of handle 226 of the input controller 200. It should beunderstood that the various master and slave positions θ may comprisevectors (in Cartesian space, polar space, joint space, or the like) aswell as simple angles or linear separations, and the kinematic chains ofthe master and slave may be quite different, often even having differentdegrees of freedom. To provide force feedback to the operator, themaster input device is actively driven by its motors toward alignmentwith the position occupied by slave 10. The amount of following forceapplied by the operator on the slave (and the reciprocal feedback on theoperator's hand) are a function of a misalignment between a position(and orientation) of the master input device and apposition (andorientation) of the slave end effector.

As illustrated schematically in FIG. 6A, master input device 200 definesan actual master position θ_(m) ^(a). This actual position of the masteris fed into the slave portion of the controller as a desired slaveposition θ_(s) ^(d). The amount of force applied by the end effectors ofthe slave will vary with the difference between the desired position ofthe slave θ_(s) ^(d) and the actual position of the slave θ_(m) ^(a),with the following force on the end effectors increasing with increasingmisalignment between the actual and desired positions, often with aproportional relationship.

To provide force feedback to the operator manipulating the master inputdevice 200, the actual slave position θ_(m) ^(a) is fed back into themotors of the input device as a desired master position θ_(s) ^(d). Onceagain, the amount of force imposed by the motors of the master on theoperator through the input device will vary with the misalignment orpositional separation between the desired master position and the actualmaster position. This allows the operator to apply varying amounts offorce through the servomechanism using the end effectors, and to havetactile feedback regarding the amount of force that has been applied.

While the reciprocal master/slave arrangement of FIG. 6A may beimplemented to actuate end effector 50 in response to manipulation ofhandle 226 for gripping of objects between end effector elements 56 aand 56 b, the uniform following forces provided by this arrangement canhave disadvantages, as can be understood with reference to FIGS. 5A-5D.End effector 50 is first shown engaging a relatively large tissue T1with no gripping force. The master position θ_(m) is equal to the slaveposition θ_(s). As there is no difference between the signals generatedto measure these positions, the positional error signal, separationmisalignment, and following forces are all zero.

Referring now to FIG. 5B, as the operator imposes squeezing forces onhandle 226 to bring gripping members 30 a, 30 b closer together (andthereby reducing the separation angle), the servomechanism begins toapply the following forces against end effector 50. As the differencebetween the grip angle and end effector angle increases, the followingforces imposed by the end effector elements against the large tissue T1(and the reactive forces of the tissue against the end effector)increase. Eventually, the following forces reach a maximum F_(m), whichmay be determined by a strength of the surgical tool, a limitation ofthe motor torque, or a limitation based on the intended uses of the tool(for example, to avoid severing of tissues with forceps). Regardless,the servomechanism will preferably limit the following forces beforeirreparable damage is inflicted on the robotic system.

To implement maximum following forces F_(m), the operator has squeezedgripping members 30 a, 30 b well beyond the separation angle between theend effector elements. While it is generally preferable to maintain aone-to-one correlation between the angles of the gripping members andend effector elements, having a significant misalignment to effect themaximum following forces is generally acceptable when the separationangle of the gripping members remains significantly above zero once themaximum following force F_(m) is imposed. Optionally, handle 30 mayimpose reciprocal forces F_(r) against the hand of the operator toprovide a tactile indication of the strength with which thick tissue T1is being gripped to the operator.

As illustrated in FIGS. 5C and 5D, the situation is less acceptable whena thin tissue T2 of negligible thickness is gripped. When just engagingthe tissue with the elements of end effector 50, the gripping members ofhandle 226 again define a separation angle that is substantially equalto the separation angle defined by the end effector elements. However,as this gripping configuration provides a quite small angular separationbetween the gripping members, imposition of maximum following forcesF_(m) against small tissue T2 only results when the gripping members arepushed beyond each other to define a negative gripping angle. Thisunnatural gripping actuation detracts from the operator's ability toaccurately control the end effectors, particularly during delicatetelepresence procedures involving the gripping of small objects, such assutures, needles, and small tissues during telesurgery.

Referring now to FIG. 6B, an alternative servomechanism arrangementartificially alters the actual master position θ_(m) ^(a), according toa function f to derive a desired slave position θ_(s) ^(d). Function ftakes the form θ_(s) ^(d)=f(θ_(m) ^(a)), and is preferably an invertible(monotonic) and continuous function of the actual master position.Function g represents reciprocal forces imposed on the hand of thesystem operator, and will preferably also comprise a continuous,invertible function. Preferably g will provide one-to-one actuation whenopen, will have the slave just closed when the master is just closed,and will have a slope below the “just closed” point so that therestoring force applied against the operator's hand matches that of aconventional tool, thereby providing feedback to the operator accuratelyreflecting the enhanced forces provided when the end effector and handleare near their closed configurations.

As can be understood with reference to FIGS. 6B and 5D, function f maybe tailored so that once the separation between the gripping membersdrops below a predetermined point a small additional decrease ingripping member separation θ_(m) ^(a) will result in a significantlylarger change in the desired position of the slave θ_(s) ^(d). Above thepredetermined point, the actual master position and desired slaveposition can remain the same, thereby providing the greatest dexterityfor the system operator's control over the end effector.

Referring now to FIG. 6C, an alternative servomechanism arrangementmakes use of function f to alter the actual position of the grip membersso as to generate the desired position of the slave end effector, asdescribed above. However, rather than relying on a reciprocalmaster/slave arrangement to provide feedback of the augmented endeffector forces as the grip members and end effector elements approachtheir closed configuration, the system of FIG. 5C relies on a biasingsystem 60 which interacts with the operator's hand 62 to provide tactilefeedback to the operator with a feed forward system, as can beunderstood with reference to U.S. Pat. No. 6,594,552, the fulldisclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.

As can be understood with reference to FIG. 7, a biasing mechanism suchas a spring, magnet, resilient bumper, or the like can define apredetermined transition point or nominally closed position of the inputhandle. In the exemplary embodiment, a biasing system includes anelastomeric bushing 60 a surrounding a grip return spring 60 b. The gripreturn spring opens the gripping members of handle 226 throughout theirrange, while the bushing provides tactile feedback to a hand of anoperator when the handle reaches a nominal closed position. Continuedmovement of the gripping members is possible beyond the nominal closedposition so as to apply force at the end effector elements. Torques areapplied to end effector elements 56 a, 56 b and positions of the endeffector elements are measured via a drive system 70, as described morefully in the '555 patent.

Referring now to FIG. 8, a robotic surgical system 400 includes aprocessor 402 coupling first and second input devices 404 to associatedrobotic manipulators 406. Each manipulator includes a tool holder 408that both holds and provides a data interface with a mounted tool 410.As tools will often be removed and replaced repeatedly during a surgicalprocedure, for example, to allow use of an electrocautery paddlefollowed by a needle grasper, a plurality of alternative tools 412 areavailable to be used in place of either of the mounted tools.

When one type of tool is removed from holder 408 and replaced by anothertype of tool, data from tool memory 230 (see FIG. 3) is transmitted fromthe newly mounted tool to the processor 402. This allows the processorto be reconfigured so as to allow the surgeon to accurately and safelyuse tools of different types. This data may also include a specific toolidentifier so as to allow the processor to determine or monitorcharacteristics and use of that particular tool, including tool life,etc. As explained in more detail in an application entitled “ToolMemory-Based Software Upgrades for Robotic Surgery,”, filed concurrentlyherewith and incorporated herein by reference, the tool memory may alsobe used to update data and/or software stored in a memory of processor402, thereby allowing the use of new tools which have been developed,approved, and/or distributed a most recent software revision has beendownloaded to processor 402 using conventional storage media, networkconnections, or the like. The grip calibration procedure describedherein may take place at least in part during downloading of data frommounted tool 410 so as to avoid unnecessary delays in a procedure, andneed not be implemented if processor 402 determines it is not needed,for example, if a tool type identifier stored in a memory of the tooland transmitted from the slave indicates that the mounted tool has onlya single end effector or if the desired grip calibration data is alreadystored in a grip calibration table 405 in a memory of the processor.

For the present invention, processor 402 may determine whether aparticular tool has been loaded on a specific manipulator, and may storegrip calibration data for that tool/manipulator combination in gripcalibration table 405. That grip calibration data may optionally be usedif the same tool is remounted on the same manipulator. Such re-use ofgrip calibration data may be limited, so that the data will only be usedif the tool is remounted within a time span, during a surgicalprocedure, a number or amount of tool use, or prior to some event.

Manipulator 406 often transmits a signal to processor 402 indicatingthat a tool has been mounted to holder 408. Processor 402 includes agrip calibration module 403, which may include hardware, software,and/or a combination of both, the grip calibration module oftencomprising machine readable code embodying programming instructions forimplementing a grip calibration method, optionally in response to thetool-mounting signal. Using this grip calibration method, processor 402can determine and store an end effector/manipulator grip offset, whichcan include offsets of the instrument (due to cable stretch,manufacturing offsets, and the like), offsets of the manipulator 406(including homing error, calibration, cable stretch, and the like),and/or interface offsets resulting from the combination of toolinterface 232 (see FIG. 3) with holder 408. Hence, the grip calibrationmodule of processor 402 can compensate for these offsets so as toimprove following of end effector jaws in response to grasping of ahandle 404. By adjusting processor 402 so as to compensate for aging ofthe manipulator and/or end effector, the grip calibration module maymaintain or improve performance of used instruments.

Referring now to FIGS. 8, 9, and 10, after instrument mounting,processor 402 implements the grip calibration method. A tool typeidentifier and a specific tool identifier may be transmitted by themanipulator from the memory of the tool to the processor, allowing theprocessor to determine whether grip calibration is appropriate. Forexample, the processor may look-up a parameter in a table of theprocessor memory associated with the tool type identifier, so that toolshaving single end-effector elements do not undergo a grip calibration,or so that a clip applier (as illustrated in FIG. 3D) does not deploy aclip during calibration. Alternatively, the processor may determine fromthe tool identifier that the mounted tool has previously been mounted tothe same manipulator previously during the same procedure, and maytherefore look-up the desired calibration information from a calibrationdata table 405. The calibration data table my comprise jaw closureoffset for specific tool manipulator combinations.

If processor 402 determines that a new calibration procedure isappropriate for the mounted tool, the processor transmits drive signalsto manipulator 408 on which a tool 410 has been mounted. In response tothese signals, one or more motors of manipulator 406 move the endeffectors into mutual engagement, with the motors typically applyingtorque to the end effectors via a coupling drive system (see FIG. 12) soas to attempt to move even further against each other, thereby squeezingthe end effector closed. In the exemplary embodiment, the processor maycommand a trajectory or movement of the end effector, causing a servocontroller loop of the processor to calculate a commanded motor torqueusing a position of the end effector element. Processor 402 monitors andstores joint position and commanded torque data as illustrated in FIGS.9 and 10, respectively. The servo counts shown in FIGS. 9-12C canrepresent time, with the exemplary servo loop operating with a cyclefrequency of 1333 Hz.

When the end effector elements are commanded to move from an openconfiguration to beyond a closed configuration, a significant change incommanded torque may be expected where the end effector are first fullyclosed, which may be referred to as a mutual engagement configuration.In other words, the associated motor will be driven harder to effect thecommanded movement after the end effectors begin pushing against eachother. This change in commanded torque may appear as a “knee” in thecommanded torque graph of FIG. 10. However, the precise location of theknee may not be immediately clear. To facilitate identification of theend effector mutual engagement position, it is helpful to limit theanalysis of the data to a limited range. The data may be restricted to aposition range within which engagement is expected to occur, therebyassuming that the calibration offset will be within a predeterminedrange. For example, it may be assumed that the calibration offset forthe end effector mutual engagement configuration will be between anominal or initially commanded configuration of the jaws being open by 5degrees (+5 degrees), and the jaws being squeezed past closed by 20degrees (−20 degrees).

The commanded torque plot of FIG. 10 may reflect variations in torqueapplied to compensate for friction in the manipulator, to enhanceprecision, and the like, as more fully described in U.S. Pat. No.6,565,554. These commanded torques are effectively noise whendetermining grip calibration, with the noise primarily being atapproximately the Nyquiest frequency, largely above the frequency ofinterest for calibration analysis. Hence, it may be helpful to includein processor 402 a filter to help identify the knee in the commandedtorque draft. The filter may comprise a low pass filter, the exemplaryfilter comprising a 5 Hz low pass Butterworth filter, although otherfrequencies might also be used. The filtered commanded torque in thearea of interest is illustrated in FIG. 11, showing the expected knee.

Referring now to FIGS. 11 and 12A-12C, the mutual engagementconfiguration of the end effector should correlate with the position ofgreatest curvature in the negative direction of the commanded torquedata. This can be identified from the minima of the second derivative ofthe commanded torque. Once the mutual engagement configuration is known,calibration of the mounted tool can then be effected by applying adifference between the actual position and the commanded position of theend effectors as an offset to the grip controllers described above, forexample, so that the closed configuration of the handle 226 (at whichthe handle members first engage the resilient bumper 60 a) correspondsto the mutual engagement configuration of the end effectors. Thisdifference can be stored as an offset in grip calibration data table 405for the tool/manipulator combination.

Typically, grip calibration will take over a half a second to implement,often taking over a second, with the exemplary embodiment taking about 2seconds. To avoid excessive delays during a procedure, processor 402 maystore the grip calibration offset or other grip data in a memory of theprocessor, with the memory ideally storing a table of grip calibrationsand instrument identifiers for each manipulator, so that the processorrecords each end effector/manipulator combination used during a surgicalprocedure. If an instrument has already been used during a procedure,the stored calibration may be used without repeating the gripcalibration—if the mounted instrument has not previously been mounted onthat particular manipulator during a procedure, the grip calibrationwill be performed. Grip calibration may be performed during data readingfrom and/or writing to information on the memory of the tool, which mayoccur when a tool is first used in each procedure.

Grip calibration may not determine an appropriate offset for atool/manipulator combination for a variety of reasons, including abroken cable or failure of the tool interface to properly engage withthe tool holder, a tool never reaching the commanded or mutualengagement configuration, and the like. For calibration failures, thegrip calibration offset can be safely set to zero, so that the tool isassumed to be at the nominally commanded configuration, as theinstruments may be inoperative (and hence will not be used anyway). Bynot storing data for calibration failures, the processor may treat thetool as not previously having been mounted on the manipulator, so thatcalibration can again be attempted.

Optionally, the grip calibration procedure may be deemed inappropriatefor one or more tool types having two end effector elements. Forexample, although a clip applier as illustrated in FIG. 3D may benefit agrip calibration, such a calibration may actuate a clip prior to theclip reaching the target tissue. Hence, the processor may forego gripcalibration in response to some tool type identifiers of such tools.

While the exemplary embodiments have been described in detail, forclarity of understanding and by way of example, a variety of changes,adaptations, and modifications will be obvious to those of skill in theart. Hence, the scope of the present invention is limited solely by theappended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A system comprising: an input linkage comprisinga first grip member movable relative to a second grip member; an endeffector comprising a first end effector element movable relative to asecond end effector element; a robotic arm transmitting a signal inresponse to mounting the end effector on the robotic arm; and aprocessor coupling the input linkage to the robotic arm, the processorconfigured to calibrate the mounted end effector in response to thesignal by bringing the first and second end effector elements intomutual engagement; wherein the input linkage and the robotic arm eachhave a plurality of degrees of freedom, the processor effecting movementof the robotic arm in response to articulation of the input linkage;wherein, between mounting of the end effector and starting a surgicalprocedure using the end effector, the processor does not effect acalibration movement of any degree of freedom of the input linkage orthe robotic arm other than said mutual engagement of the first andsecond end effector elements.
 2. The system of claim 1, the robotic armcomprising at least one motor driving the end effector, wherein theprocessor comprises programming to calibrate the mounted end effectorby: monitoring a commanded torque signal to the at least one motor;monitoring position of the first and second end effector elements; andidentifying a change in the commanded torque signal versus the positionof the first and second end effector elements.
 3. The system of claim 2,wherein the processor comprises programming to: filter the commandedtorque signal prior to identifying the change.
 4. The system of claim 3,wherein the processor determines an end effector initial engagementconfiguration using a second derivative of the filtered commanded torquesignal.
 5. The system of claim 4, the processor configured to, during asurgical procedure, apply no additional torque to said at least onemotor beyond a position of the end effector elements corresponding tothe end effector initial engagement configuration.
 6. The system ofclaim 4, wherein a feedback force is applied to the first and secondgrip members at a nominal closed position, and wherein the end effectorinitial engagement configuration corresponds to the nominal closedposition.
 7. The system of claim 6, wherein the first and second gripmembers comprise a biasing means for increasing resistance to grippingof the first and second grip members at the nominal closed position. 8.The system of claim 1, the processor further configured to calibrate themounted end effector once per surgical procedure for each end effectormounted on the robotic arm.
 9. The system of claim 1, the plurality ofdegrees of freedom of the input linkage comprising three orientationaldegrees of freedom of the first and second grip members, the pluralityof degrees of freedom of the robotic arm comprising six degrees offreedom.
 10. The system of claim 1, further comprising a single elementend effector, wherein a single end effector signal is transmitted by therobotic arm when the single element end effector is mounted on therobotic arm, and wherein the processor does not calibrate the mountedend effector in response to the single end effector signal.
 11. A methodcomprising: mounting an end effector to a robotic arm movable in aplurality of degrees of freedom, the end effector comprising a first endeffector element movable relative to a second end effector element;calibrating the mounted end effector by moving at least one of the endeffector elements so as to bring the end effector elements into mutualengagement, the calibrating being performed in response to the mountingof the end effector to the robotic arm; moving a first grip member of ahandle relative to a second grip member of the handle in response togripping; articulating the end effector elements so that the endeffector elements move in correlation with the moving of the gripmembers of the handle; and between the mounting the end effector andstarting a surgical procedure using the end effector, not effecting acalibration movement of any degree of freedom of the robotic arm otherthan said calibrating the mounted end effector.
 12. The method of claim11, the calibrating further comprising: transmitting a commanded torquesignal to at least one motor of the robotic arm to move the endeffector; monitoring position of the first and second end effectorelements relative to said commanded torque signal; and identifying anend effector element initial engagement drive position from a change inrelationship between the commanded torque signal and the position of thefirst and second end effector elements.
 13. The method of claim 12,further comprising filtering the monitored position prior to theidentifying.
 14. The method of claim 12, wherein the identifyingcomprises determining a second derivative of the commanded torque signalversus the monitored position.
 15. The method of claim 12, wherein thehandle generates a feedback force at a nominal closed position of thehandle, and wherein the identified end effector element initialengagement drive position corresponds to the nominal closed position ofthe handle.
 16. The method of claim 15, further comprising increasingresistance to the moving the handle at the nominal closed positionduring a surgical procedure using the end effector.
 17. The method ofclaim 11, further comprising removing the end effector from the roboticarm and mounting a second end effector having a single end effectorelement to the robotic arm, wherein a single element end effector signalis transmitted by the robotic arm when the second end effector ismounted thereon, and wherein no calibrating of the second end effectorelement is performed in response to the single element end effectorsignal.